The presentation challenges the prevailing view among city planners that denser cities are more sustainable and resilient. There are aspects of low density, suburban development which contain a huge potential for self-sufficiency in key life resources and services. This allows the periphery of the city - the reviled 'urban sprawl' - to be better prepared for the impacts of global warming, than the dense, compact core.
Clinico-mycological profile of isolates of superficial fungal infection: A st...
Climate change and the future of cities
1. Department of Planning Aalborg University
25 September 2018, 10-12 am.
THE FUTURE OF CITIES UNDER CLIMATE CHANGE
Is it time to reconsider urban sprawl?
Dr Dushko Bogunovich
Adjunct Associate Professor (Urban Design)
School of Architecture and Planning
The University of Auckland
14. Department of Planning Aalborg University
25 September 2018, 10-12 am.
THE FUTURE OF CITIES UNDER CLIMATE CHANGE
Is it time to reconsider urban sprawl?
Dr Dushko Bogunovich
Adjunct Associate Professor (Urban Design)
School of Architecture and Planning
The University of Auckland
23. • SYNOPSIS
- Planning in Auckland (since 2010; amalgamation)
- Four reasons why ‘compact city’ model is in trouble:
- geography
- technology
- culture
- affordability
- Further reasons why the ‘compact city’ model cannot work:
- pressure for growth
- climate change
- Conclusion: Urban planning worldwide needs a paradigm shift:
“Sustainable City” or “Resilient City-region”?
- Global implications: ‘urban sprawl’ is our new reality and more is
coming >>> we must re-evaluate its pro and cons
24. • STRUCTURE
• Planning in Auckland
• What’s wrong with the ‘compact city’?
• What’s wrong with the climate?
• Should we re-consider ‘urban sprawl’?
• Global implications
(from China… to Denmark?)
26. The Auckland Plan
..… by pursuing the policy of
urban containment, i.e. adopting
the “compact city” model (70% -
30% split between in-city and
out-of-city development)
…..
30. Independent Hearings Panel (2015) concludes with Recommendations
which do not question intensification but do put some limitations on it,
and expand the RUBs (thus recognising the pressure for growth Out and
limits to growth Up)
My ‘forecast’ for the Plan: the original 70% to 30% ratio
extremely unlikely to be achieved. More likely, 50% to 50%.
However, I still argue 30% to 70% would be better.
32. Compact City – neither realistic, nor
desirable for Auckland!
An alternative proposition:
regional city …
linear city …
water city…
polycentric city...
33. Compact City – neither realistic, nor
desirable for Auckland!
An alternative proposition:
regional city …
linear city …
water city…
polycentric city...
36. Why the compact city model
is NOT appropriate for Auckland?
3 reasons:
• geography (landscape)
• technology (infrastructure)
• culture (lifestyle)
• affordability (housing)
44. New technologies make it possible to reduce the
suburbs’ heavy energy dependence and massive
carbon footprint.
Instead of being insatiable consumers of resources,
the suburbs could become net producers.
Self-sufficiency in food, water, sanitation, stormwater
management, power, some fuel & fibre…. becomes
possible once the intensity of development (‘density’)
drops.
58. When you constrain the supply of land
for urban development, the housing
land market gets distorted and the price
of residential property goes through the
roof…. Aucklans is one of the most
expensive cities in the world!
62. The FOUR reasons why the ‘compact city’
strategy is struggling six years after the
Auckland Plan vision document:
• geography (landscape)
• technology (infrastructure)
• culture (lifestyle)
• affordability (housing)
90. The ongoing global urban expansion is fundamentally about
peripheral growth – suburan and peri-urban.
Cities have always grown both horizontally (‘expansion’)
and vertically (‘intensification/densification’), but the horizontal
expansion is faster.
Cities grow Out about 2 to 3 times more than Up.
103. “What does the data tell us? It shows
that all is not well in the state of the
atmosphere! In order to prevent further
warming, the carbon dioxide levels must
not grow any further. On the growth
curve, this corresponds to the curve
having to settle down to -0- ppm/y.
There is absolutely no hint in the data
that this is happening. On the contrary,
the rate of growth is itself growing,
having now reached about 2.3 ppm/y the
highest growth rate ever seen in modern
times. This is not just a “business as
usual” scenario, it is worse than that,
we’re actually moving backwards,
becoming more and more
unsustainable with every year. This
shows unequivocally that the efforts
undertaken so-far to limit greenhouse
gases such as carbon dioxide are
woefully inadequate.” (Carl Edward
Rasmussen, University of Cambridge,
Sept. 14, 2018)
104. The melting of the permafrost and the ‘methane bomb’ - WHEN?
105.
106.
107.
108.
109. Since the Paris Agreement seem to have little or
no impact on reducing the GHG emission, and
more global warming is in the pipeline anyway,
the likelihood is that we will breach the 2 degrees
C boundary. Therefore, the only realistic position
is to be pessimistic!
Planners and cities, take notice.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114. If so, then is too late for
Sustainability (mitigation)…?
If so, then is it more urgent now to focus on
Resilience (adaptation)...?
121. So - if climate change is poised to start
causing major disruptions in cities
worldwide as soon as after 2020, isn’t it
time to stop advocating denser urban
form and ever more dependence on
large, centralised urban infrastructure
systems?
122. • Is ‘sustainable sprawl’ possible?
• Is the ‘resilient city-region’ the new paradigm,
rather than the ‘sustainable city’?
